On 15 May 2017 at 23:08, Insight Thekrab via arch-general
wrote:
> now it's needed one year for 5.9 ?
Nope! [1]
[1] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/log/trunk?h=packages/ardour
--
GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
now it's needed one year for 5.9 ?
2017-04-26 20:46 GMT+02:00 David Runge :
> On 2017-04-26 16:09:00 (+0600), Rashif Ray Rahman wrote:
> > Sorry guys really no excuse other than "RL". Some of the other packagers
> > did help to update a few of my packages but ardour seems to have been
> > missed,
On 2017-04-26 16:09:00 (+0600), Rashif Ray Rahman wrote:
> Sorry guys really no excuse other than "RL". Some of the other packagers
> did help to update a few of my packages but ardour seems to have been
> missed, most likely because it remained in testing. I have updated and
> moved immediately to
Sorry guys really no excuse other than "RL". Some of the other packagers
did help to update a few of my packages but ardour seems to have been
missed, most likely because it remained in testing. I have updated and
moved immediately to [extra].
On 22 March 2017 at 16:27, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On
On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:07:00 +0100, David Runge wrote:
>On 2017-03-16 12:26:36 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
>> On 2017-03-01 15:16:32 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
>> > Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
>> > We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
>> PING
>Come on man... this is getting ridiculous.
He's
On 2017-03-16 12:26:36 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
> On 2017-03-01 15:16:32 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
> > Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
> > We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
> PING
Come on man... this is getting ridiculous.
--
https://sleepmap.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 2017-03-01 15:16:32 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
> Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
> We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
PING
--
https://sleepmap.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 08:59:28 -0500, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
>On 03/03/2017 08:02 AM, David Runge wrote:
>> On 2017-03-01 15:16:32 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
>>> Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
>>> We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
>>> [1] http://community.ardour.org/node/14325
>> Oh
On 03/03/2017 08:02 AM, David Runge wrote:
> On 2017-03-01 15:16:32 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
>> Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
>> We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
>> [1] http://community.ardour.org/node/14325
> Oh well in case anyone's interested: There's a PKGBUILD and
> ardour.desktop file
On 2017-03-03 14:02:15 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
> Oh well in case anyone's interested: There's a PKGBUILD and
> ardour.desktop file attached to this e-mail... -_-
Whoops, no attachments allowed.
$ cat ardour/PKGBUILD
pkgname=ardour
pkgver=5.8
pkgrel=1
pkgdesc="Professional-grade digital au
On 2017-03-01 15:16:32 (+0100), David Runge wrote:
> Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
> We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
> [1] http://community.ardour.org/node/14325
Oh well in case anyone's interested: There's a PKGBUILD and
ardour.desktop file attached to this e-mail... -_-
--
https://sleepma
Can we update to 5.8 [1] then?
We're still at 4.7 in the repos.
[1] http://community.ardour.org/node/14325
--
https://sleepmap.de
On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 11:37:46 +0600, Ray Rashif wrote:
>On 18 February 2017 at 10:57, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> did you notice this
>>
>> http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.
>> org/2017-February/028286.html
>>
>> ?
>Ralf,
>
>No, thanks for pointing that out. Since we don't track
On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 11:37:46 +0600, Ray Rashif wrote:
>On 18 February 2017 at 10:57, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> did you notice this
>>
>> http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.
>> org/2017-February/028286.html
>>
>> ?
>Ralf,
>
>No, thanks for pointing that out. Since we don't track mast
Ralf,
No, thanks for pointing that out. Since we don't track master we'll have to
backport the particular fix if they don't tag a release.
On 18 February 2017 at 10:57, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> did you notice this
>
> http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.
> org/2017-Februa
Hi,
did you notice this
http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.org/2017-February/028286.html
?
Regards,
Ralf
Hey all
There is no excuse for my tardiness here, thesis defense or not. I have
updated ardour now in testing. I will not delay pushing to extra this time.
Thanks for all your patience.
Best,
Ray
On 12 February 2017 at 07:32, Donovan Cameron via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 11/02/17 06:24 PM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
Please, helpful suggestions only! And keep in mind this is not the
aur-general mailing list, so AUR-specific advice is not helpful (and I
suspect ardour users don't want to see it dropped to the AUR either).
Um... sorry?
--
Kind regard
On 02/11/2017 07:33 PM, Donovan Cameron via arch-general wrote:
> Hey Britt,
>
> We've kind of all experienced delayed package updates and I recommend
> the following, it will let it take it's natural course!
>
> 1.) Flag it out of date, probably is already
The maintainer is certainly aware, th
Hey Britt,
We've kind of all experienced delayed package updates and I recommend
the following, it will let it take it's natural course!
1.) Flag it out of date, probably is already
2.) Inquire with the package maintainer directly over email and offer
suggestions or to help
3.) Seek a co-m
20 matches
Mail list logo
